StrangeSox

QUOTE (NorthSideSox72 @ Feb 11, 2010 -> 04:20 PM) I think he was originally pointing out that you are using an inflation adjustment for market cap, but not using one for the natural increases in fixed and employee costs. And also not counting opportunity costs of "what else could that $60B have done?"

QUOTE (Jenksismyb**** @ Feb 10, 2010 -> 08:01 PM) I really hope you're joking about them trying. This Congress, with a majority, and a President, hasn't done JACK s*** in THREE plus years. How are they TRYING to govern right now? They should have been able to pass ANYTHING they wanted WITHOUT OPPOSITION until 2 weeks ago. They went through TWO election cycles where they CREAMED the Repubs because the country wanted CHANGE. But they didn't. Any why not? Because they don't give a f*** all about any one of us. They want votes. They want reelection. They want a nice ass pension so they can retire next to a bridge they built in their district. I don't want to bash any specific party, because they both suck big donkey balls (for lack of a better phrase), and if you can't see that, then there's no helping you. The entire system is a failure right now because no one governs for anyone but the people that paid for the fancy plate at campaign dinners. And this squabble right now is EXACTLY what both parties want. Because then we have no choice but to choose between a douche and a turd sandwich. I have to agree with the general idea here. The Democrats could have passed something if they weren't such cowards, Reid in particular.

QUOTE (kapkomet @ Feb 10, 2010 -> 09:49 PM) It's because the only solution doesn't have to be government to every single answer that ails us. NO ONE has ever said we shouldn't try to achieve solutions to issues. But, we don't have to listen to "government saves" as the only answer. Bulls***. A good percentage of Americans and most conservatives don't even believe it is a real issue. They envision grand, global plots by scientists to enrich themselves and leftists to control everyone.

QUOTE (kapkomet @ Feb 10, 2010 -> 09:05 PM) 3.0 to 4.5 million years ago, something happened. In 10 years, the same thing that took thousands of years will happen, and we will all DIE~~~~~~D That's hilarity and instanity for you. We've released a millions of years worth of stored carbon/ energy in about 150 years.

Some people are absolutely crazy.

QUOTE (BigSqwert @ Feb 10, 2010 -> 10:39 AM) It was the 2nd time someone in alternate 815 looked at someone with familiarity. Kate stared at Jack for a few seconds and last week Jack stared at Desmond. I wonder what that means and how it will unfold. Yeah but Jack had actually met Desmond before when he was training at that stadium.

QUOTE (lostfan @ Feb 10, 2010 -> 11:02 AM) bald-faced hypocrisy. Not anything I didn't already know, but nice. The caucus truly and honestly doesn't care about actual governing, and even policies they think are good they'll just vote against. Obama called them out at the Q&A too, they really don't care though. Sure, because they believe that government is the root of all evil. So, the less they actually govern, the better everything will be!

I wish they'd just kill Kate. I didn't care about the love triangle in season 3 and I really don't care now. So much for answers. I'm still convinced the only way this makes sense in the end is if the series finale is a 3 hour special with the creators and a room full of white boards.

QUOTE (Rex Kicka** @ Feb 9, 2010 -> 04:18 PM) I think its kind of funny. But he probably shouldn't do that. Funny from Colbert or Stewart, inappropriate from the WH Press Secretary. Then again, they are just paid liars and deflectors.

No, but I find that different than "betting" on an Iranian revolution and likely bloodshed to make yourself wealthier while providing no value to the actual situation. edit: I should have said morally wrong, not ethically. I do not believe it is an unethical or dishonest action.

I find something ethically wrong with trying to make a buck on a situation like that.

Dude I am so pro-abortion.

If you're moving at speed, you won't notice much of a difference if anything at all from power steering. I have a car with manual steering and its only a PITA in parking lots. Any modern car is going to have a rev limiter, too, so while it won't sound very nice, your engine isn't going to blow itself up and you'll still have power steering + brakes.

QUOTE (southsider2k5 @ Feb 8, 2010 -> 02:21 PM) Their job is to constantly have pricing pressures priced into a stock. Waiting around six months for actual policy is irrational. The whole point is to be prepared for that. That's why reaction happens when it is news. But if no policy ever comes to fruition, what real pressure was there?

What happens at the specialist level of exchanges that makes major market moves in reaction to a Presidential speech long before any policy comes to fruition rational?

Actually, it was leaks at two other sites (Byron and Dresden) but not at Clinton. http://www.encyclopedia.com/doc/1P2-11689816.html

LOL I actually meant the plant about half way between ISU and UIUC.

[sigh] Gotta love IL politics.

QUOTE (Flash Tizzle @ Jan 27, 2010 -> 02:17 PM) And this all stems from that man and his family who were killed because the car's accelerator was stuck to the ground. If they never dialed 911, and had their last moments of anguish recorded for everyone to hear, it probably wouldn't have led to this. I never understood that. Why can't they put it in neutral, turn off the engine or slam on the brakes (just about any car that isn't a complete POS should be able to out-brake its own engine)?

QUOTE (lostfan @ Feb 8, 2010 -> 10:58 AM) This Onion article sums up a lot of those people perfectly, especially considering it's a satire article. Area Man Passionate Defender of What He Imagines Constitution To Be It's the same thing people do with religious texts -- project their own ideals and beliefs into the documents for justification of them.

I'm pretty sure Clinton had a leak as well a few years back.

QUOTE (southsider2k5 @ Feb 8, 2010 -> 08:28 AM) Except that the speeches that have been reacted to the worst are the ones where he actually does things like talking about taxing banks and punishing the financial sector in general. You know actually things that could change the worth of a business? Massive sell-off to a speech, before a bill is even crafted in either house, does not seem like rational reactions to me.

Or socialism. Because their knowledge of what communism and socialism actually are is not nearly as deep as their knowledge of the Constitution.

QUOTE (iamshack @ Feb 8, 2010 -> 01:33 AM) Seriously, horrible? May I ask your age? I like The Who and I thought it was a very mediocre show.

The tea party crowds have had a strong undercurrent of populism; populism usually has a lot of "angry" politics; Tom Tancredo makes the craziest of the tea party people look completely sane and rational. Why is that such a controversial idea?